Fifty-four percent of those surveyed say it is a bad thing that Republicans control the House

Unfortunately a national "majority" in that feeling will have little effect in changing it, since the house is a heavily gerrymandered POS.... the democrats in raw votes "won" in the house in 2012, but, obviously, more districts were won by the GOP... they just have a lot more little crappy western and southern districts that don't require as many votes to win to gain 1 representative.

IMO those polls would have to get minimum 60-65% before I think that the house could actually switch back.

dletter:Fifty-four percent of those surveyed say it is a bad thing that Republicans control the House

Unfortunately a national "majority" in that feeling will have little effect in changing it, since the house is a heavily gerrymandered POS.... the democrats in raw votes "won" in the house in 2012, but, obviously, more districts were won by the GOP... they just have a lot more little crappy western and southern districts that don't require as many votes to win to gain 1 representative.

IMO those polls would have to get minimum 60-65% before I think that the house could actually switch back.

To add to this: it doesn't matter a damn what the general public thinks about the Speaker of the House. The Speaker only has to worry about his his popularity amongst his district + 218 people from other districts.

As long as Republicans have the majority, it's unlikely Boehner will lose his Speakership. There's an incentive to capitulate to Boehner's desire to keep the gavel. If his fellow Republicans take away his Speakership role, he might just take his ball and go home, and that means his party would lose his fund raising ability, which is considered impressive. That would be a hard loss to bear considering Boehner's popularity with the business community.Additionally, there's the whole "devil you know" perspective on things. Republicans understand that if Boehner is removed, there's a chance, however small, that one of the tea party Representatives could get the gavel, and that would be a disaster that even the Republicans don't want to risk.

geek_mars:As long as Republicans have the majority, it's unlikely Boehner will lose his Speakership. There's an incentive to capitulate to Boehner's desire to keep the gavel. If his fellow Republicans take away his Speakership role, he might just take his ball and go home, and that means his party would lose his fund raising ability, which is considered impressive. That would be a hard loss to bear considering Boehner's popularity with the business community.Additionally, there's the whole "devil you know" perspective on things. Republicans understand that if Boehner is removed, there's a chance, however small, that one of the tea party Representatives could get the gavel, and that would be a disaster that even the Republicans don't want to risk.

So we'll just continue to point out how useless his tenure has been as Speaker because that failure brings in the money from the business community? Okay, let's go with it. He'll continue to do nothing productive and cave when it's time to make some big boy decisions. Until the House leans a different color, of course...

dletter:Fifty-four percent of those surveyed say it is a bad thing that Republicans control the House

Unfortunately a national "majority" in that feeling will have little effect in changing it, since the house is a heavily gerrymandered POS.... the democrats in raw votes "won" in the house in 2012, but, obviously, more districts were won by the GOP... they just have a lot more little crappy western and southern districts that don't require as many votes to win to gain 1 representative.

IMO those polls would have to get minimum 60-65% before I think that the house could actually switch back.

...national polls don't matter at all. The only poll that matters is the one taken in Boehner's district every two years. Same for every other Congressman. Thus, why incumbent re-election rates are still 90% for a body that has a single-digit approval rating: "I hate Congress! ...but I loooooove my Congressman!"

dletter:Fifty-four percent of those surveyed say it is a bad thing that Republicans control the House

Unfortunately a national "majority" in that feeling will have little effect in changing it, since the house is a heavily gerrymandered POS.... the democrats in raw votes "won" in the house in 2012, but, obviously, more districts were won by the GOP... they just have a lot more little crappy western and southern districts that don't require as many votes to win to gain 1 representative.

IMO those polls would have to get minimum 60-65% before I think that the house could actually switch back.

You don't need gerrymandering. If house seats in Democratic districts are won at 70% and Republican ones are won at 55% it is easy to get to the 54% general population figure.

Triple Oak:geek_mars: As long as Republicans have the majority, it's unlikely Boehner will lose his Speakership. There's an incentive to capitulate to Boehner's desire to keep the gavel. If his fellow Republicans take away his Speakership role, he might just take his ball and go home, and that means his party would lose his fund raising ability, which is considered impressive. That would be a hard loss to bear considering Boehner's popularity with the business community.Additionally, there's the whole "devil you know" perspective on things. Republicans understand that if Boehner is removed, there's a chance, however small, that one of the tea party Representatives could get the gavel, and that would be a disaster that even the Republicans don't want to risk.

So we'll just continue to point out how useless his tenure has been as Speaker because that failure brings in the money from the business community? Okay, let's go with it. He'll continue to do nothing productive and cave when it's time to make some big boy decisions. Until the House leans a different color, of course...

Useless to the country at large, sure; but not to the business interests that support him. They're not facing Congressional investigations into their shady practices. They're not facing increased regulation. They're making boatloads of money. And when push came to shove, he avoided default.I'm not saying he's not despicable, or that I approve of him as Speaker. I'm just saying that his party doesn't have a lot of reason to take the gavel from him.

That's scary, dude. If he drinks himself into passing out, one of his employees might throw his head into the juicer.

I've always wondered if Boehner was an actual alcoholic (someone utterly dependent on it) or just a hard drinker. If it's the latter, he's no worse than a gajillion other people who power drink at social functions or sporting events. Despite what MADD would have us believe, there are plenty of high-functioning people who get sh*tfaced once they clock out. And yes, despite Boehner's politics and seemingly impotent command of his own troops, he is a high-functioning guy compared to your average Farker.

I gave it a cursory Google and can't find any real credible evidence supporting that he's anything but a party animal and not a guy who requires three scotches just to get dressed in the morning. We've seen 4,853 pics of Obama drinking beer but even the FOX crowd doesn't often stoop to calling him a drunk.

I guess what I'm saying is that some liberals' preferred attack of calling the man a raging drunk without any real proof is kind of unfair. And for the record, I hate that sonofab*tch Boehner. Not as much as Cantor, Ryan, Cruz, and the rest of Special Olympics brigade, but I definitely dislike him.

dickfreckle:I guess what I'm saying is that some liberals' preferred attack of calling the man a raging drunk without any real proof is kind of unfair. And for the record, I hate that sonofab*tch Boehner.

It's mostly speculation based on past public appearances (in his official capacities as a rep) where he seemed a bit slurry, combined with emotional outbursts and crying. Add to that the "Man, I'd drink too if I had to deal with the TP" sentiment, and his most likely unremarkable drinking habits suddenly swell into a mythological depression-driven alcoholism that is almost certainly more to be pitied than hated.

Basically, we'd rather believe he's a drunk than that he's been doing all this in a sober and objective state of mind with any degree of foresight or planning.

incendi:dickfreckle: I guess what I'm saying is that some liberals' preferred attack of calling the man a raging drunk without any real proof is kind of unfair. And for the record, I hate that sonofab*tch Boehner.

It's mostly speculation based on past public appearances (in his official capacities as a rep) where he seemed a bit slurry, combined with emotional outbursts and crying. Add to that the "Man, I'd drink too if I had to deal with the TP" sentiment, and his most likely unremarkable drinking habits suddenly swell into a mythological depression-driven alcoholism that is almost certainly more to be pitied than hated.

Basically, we'd rather believe he's a drunk than that he's been doing all this in a sober and objective state of mind with any degree of foresight or planning.

In other words, he's not selling his cock holster behind the Circle K for watered-down drinks the chicks left behind. The man has an unenviable gig. I sure as hell wouldn't want to be in charge of the corralling of cats that is the current GOP. If I were, I'd look as drunk and stupefied If Mr. Orange wants to snap the foil from a Johnnie Walker Blue, I say more power to him. Lord knows I would.

MrPleasant:dletter: Fifty-four percent of those surveyed say it is a bad thing that Republicans control the House

Unfortunately a national "majority" in that feeling will have little effect in changing it, since the house is a heavily gerrymandered POS.... the democrats in raw votes "won" in the house in 2012, but, obviously, more districts were won by the GOP... they just have a lot more little crappy western and southern districts that don't require as many votes to win to gain 1 representative.

IMO those polls would have to get minimum 60-65% before I think that the house could actually switch back.

You don't need gerrymandering. If house seats in Democratic districts are won at 70% and Republican ones are won at 55% it is easy to get to the 54% general population figure.

But, part of the reason for that is gerrymandering, in some places. Some of it is that all the districts in the great plains/mountain states are small, mostly GOP districts that will likely never change from that.